Back
1989 Supreme(Ori) 259
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
V. Gopalaswamy, D.P. Mohapatra, JJ.
ZENITH INDUSTRIAL SERVICES AND OTHERS - APPELLANT
Versus
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Original Jurisdiction Case No. 919 of 1980
Decided On : 19-04-1989
Jagannath Das, K.K. Jena and G. Das, for the Appellant; A.B. Misra, S.C. (Central) and Ashok Kumar Mohanty, for the Respondent
The appropriate Government must consult with the Central Board and consider the relevant factors specified in Section 10(2) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 before issuing a notification prohibiting employment of contract labour.
Headnote:
CONTRACT LABOUR (REGULATION AND ABOLITION) ACT, 1970 - SECTION 10 - Notification prohibiting employment of contract labour in overburden removal and drilling and blasting works in limestone, dolomite and manganese mines - Validity - Consultation with Central Board and consideration of relevant factors mandatory - Notification quashed for non-compliance.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, a registered partnership firm, challenged the notification issued by the Ministry of Labour prohibiting the employment of contract labour in overburden removal and drilling and blasting works in limestone, dolomite and manganese mines in the country. The petitioner argued that the notification was invalid as it was issued without complying with the mandatory requirements of Section 10(1) and Clauses (a) to (d) of Section 10(2) of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the notification was liable to be quashed as the Central Government had failed to consult with the Central Board before issuing the notification and had not considered the relevant factors specified in Section 10(2) of the Act.
Issues: 1. Whether the notification prohibiting employment of contract labour in overburden removal and drilling and blasting works in limestone, dolomite and manganese mines was valid.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the notification was invalid as the Central Government had failed to consult with the Central Board before issuing the notification and had not considered the relevant factors specified in Section 10(2) of the Act. The Court observed that consultation with the Central Board and consideration of relevant factors were mandatory requirements under Section 10 of the Act and that the notification was liable to be quashed for non-compliance.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the notification prohibiting employment of contract labour in overburden removal and drilling and blasting works in limestone, dolomite and manganese mines in the country.
JUDGMENT :
V. Gopalaswamy, J. - In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner No. 1 M/s. Zenith Industrial Services, a registered partnership firm and its partners petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 challenge the notification No. S. 16025/5 8/77-LW dated 15th December 1979 issued from the Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, Government of India u/s 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') prohibiting the employment of contract labour in the works for overburden, removal and drilling and blasting in limestone, dolomite and manganese mines in the country with effect from the date on which the period of six months from the date of publication of the said notification expires.
2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition may be briefly stated as follows: One of the objects of the petitioner-registered firm is to carry on the business of 'Contract' and in pursuance of the said object the peritioner-firm entered into a contract with the Orissa Cement Limited, a public limited company (opposite party No. 2) for doing the jobs of excavation and removal of surface soil, refuse, spoils, deadstone, ferruginous clay etc., in the limestone quarries of opposite party No. 2 with effect from 1st February 1978. Opposite party No. 2 is a manufacturer of cement and its cement factory is at Rajgangpur. Limestone is one of the main raw materials required for the manufacture of cement. Opposite party No. 2 owns limestone quarries at village Lanjiberna situated at a distance of 13 KMs. from Rajgangpur in the district of Sundargarh. Before the actual mining operation of limestone is done, various preliminary operations have to be done such as excavation and removal of surface soil, refuse, spoils, deadstone, ferruginous cray and transporating the same to a place within a radius of two miles. It is for doing all these jobs such as excavation etc., petitioner No. 1 firm was engaged as a contractor by opposite party No. 2 under Contract No. RKN 200 dated 10th January 1978. The period of contract was from 1st January 1978 to 31st December 1980 and it may continue even thereafter subject to the satisfactory performance of the contract. For the performance of the contract, the petitioner No. 1 used to engage contract labour and 210 such workers were on its rolls though the average daily attendance was 150. The petitioner-firm claims that it has been complying with all the requirements of the Act relating to the welfare of the workers and the workers employed by him as contract labour were enjoying all the benefits available to regularly employed workmen. The Ministry of Labour, New Delhi, issued the notification dated 15th December 1979 Annexure-4 prohibiting" the employment of contract labour in the works of overburden, removal and drilling and blasting in the limestone mines of the entire country. In pursuance of that notification, Annexure-5 dated 11th March 1980 was issued by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar, opposite party No. 3, advising the opposite party No. 2 not to employ contract labour through contractors in the prohibited categories of work mentioned in the notification Annexure-4 and as a consequence of Annexure-5, opposite party No. 2, by his letter dated 19th May 1980 (Annexure-6) issued notice to the petitioner No. 1 terminating the contract earlier entered into with it on 10th January 1978 with effect from 18th June 1980. Being aggrieved by the said notification of the Ministry of Labour (Annexure-4) which has ultimately resulted in the termination of his contract by opposite party No. 2, the petitioner-firm and its partners filed this writ petition against opposite party No. 1 the Union of India, the Orissa Cement Limited opposite party No. 2 and the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Bhubaneswar, opposite party No. 3, praying for quashing the above referred Annexures 4, 5 and 6.
3. The petitioners plead in their writ petitio
